Yes, I just read it. Now, we don't have to use, for .45 cal shooters, a 230 FMJ hardball load. We can use "safe ammunition." That will make a huge difference. One question, can I shoot wad loads using my Les Baer Hardball pistol, or will that be too light of a load to not cause the slide to function?

The other change, which I am not sure will work in terms of accuracy, is the whole list of "service pistols" now allowed in a variety of calibers. I love my Glock 35 in .40 S&W, but I am not sure frankly that it will shoot 10-ring shots, strong hand only, at 50 yards, nonetheless rapid and sustained at 25-yards. I think for all of the pistols listed, the function of the pistol is "too loose" to get the accuracy needed to be competitive for this style of shooting. The other problem, particularly with the Glock 35, is the 3.5 lb trigger connector is standard. We would need to upgrade to 4lbs.

I like the new rule that states a total score of 250 or higher gets leg points. This will help tremendously in getting other shooters to compete since the number of pistol shooters currently competing at local EIC pistol matches are small. Thus, the use of a percentage of 10% gets only 1 shooter to win leg points, which really discourages shooters from even competing (unless at Nationals).

For the 22 shooters, there is now a separate Distinguished Pistol Badge for .22 Rimfire Pistol. Awesome!!! That will really bring out more shooters to CMP matches.

I think that an all inclusive list of permitted manufacturers and models will be difficult to establish and maintain. Historically many "ball guns" were built up specifically for EIC matches using frames such as Crown City and Essex which are not on the list and may no longer be available. There are many other companies that have manufactured or are presently manufacturing 1911 pattern pistols that would be suitable for these matches. Are they to be excluded because they were forgotten when the list was put together?

On the revolver side, S&W K, L, and N frames are allowed in 38 Special/357 Magnum, 44 Magnum, and 45 Colt. Was there a reason for leaving 41 Magnum and 45 ACP off of the list? The list seems to include models that are currently manufactured and omits the older models with 2 digit model numbers such as 10, 15, 19, 25, and 29 as well as the models such as Combat Masterpiece that were named rather than being numbered. Would it be better to use a functional description rather than trying to list the manufacturer and specific model numbers.

BElito wrote:I like the new rule that states a total score of 250 or higher gets leg points. This will help tremendously in getting other shooters to compete since the number of pistol shooters currently competing at local EIC pistol matches are small. Thus, the use of a percentage of 10% gets only 1 shooter to win leg points, which really discourages shooters from even competing (unless at Nationals).

I didn't read it that way, I believe the number of points awarded and is still based on the number of shooters. It said a minimum score must be 250. If 20 people show up for an EIC match and no one shoots 250 or higher no points are awarded. If 7 people show up and they all shoot 250 or better only the high score will get the 6 points. If only one person shows up and shoots a 270 there are no EIC points awarded.

I think the wadcutters would be ok as you state but the no external modifications would squash the other points.

"Pistols may be match conditioned provided there are no external modifications that are not specifically approved in the rules (i.e. adjustable sights, stippled grip or frame, combat-style hammers and grip safeties on M1911s, etc.)"

I disagree with BMAC's interpretation. I believe that the items listed in the parenthesis are examples of specifically approved items. Being that adjustable sights are in that list, and adjustable sights and stippled grips and frames are allowed, I believe they intend to allow combat hammers and other than GI grip safeties as part of this rule change.

I am extremely impressed how thoughtful this proposal is. It does a great job of explaining the why they are seeking a change, and asking for input instead of, "here are the new rules" like NRA has bungled over the last 2 years.

a. Be U. S service pistols or pistols derived from service pistol designs.

The M1911's qualify as service pistols. We will just need their clarification on what specifically allowed modifications will be on their list to reveal if most iron-sighted wad guns will be allowed. Based on everything else they are saying, it definitely looks like that will be their intent.

I like the proposal for 22 competition. Opening up the service pistol rules may lessen what it took to metal out, but everyone still is competing under the same rules, as long as the rules are clear. I'm glad I didn't buy a new hardball gun this year. It would be great to be able to use a wadcutter, set up with open sights and a rail, for both NRA Conventional Bullseye and CMP competition. Instead of having to invest in an expensive hardball gun, I can just swap out the sear spring to make trigger weight. Ammo costs would be minimalized as I could use my Bullseye ammo. More matches? Great! I like the achivement awards (awards in lieu of EIC/placing awards) concept; this will help attract new shooters, perhaps to use the approved guns they already have, then upgrade to wadcutters when they understand how accruate they are. Perhaps this will lead to more Bullseye shooters as well. Local clubs could run CMP leagues that, while not eligible for EIC points, could earn achivement metals/pins. Seems like the CMP is putting some thought into these changes. And allowing imput. I likey.

I like this. Certainly will increase the participation especially wth entry level shooters in the .22 distinguished category.

I also like the extended list of eligible pistols.

I especially like the fact that the 1911 class is wide open. Lots of custom ball guns are 1911's and not any specific manufacturer. Plus, the silly rules like no squared frame (My 1911 had a beveled not rounded frame forward of the trigger guard and was dsq'd when I went to the marine or NG trailers but passed the CMP inspection every time.).

I hope the changes draw more people. I also hope the traditionalists can accept that some changes must be made in order to keep the sport going.

I would love to see the CMP give an award at Perry and the Regional games for highest Pistol and Rifle aggregate. It could be the aggregate of the EICs or the P100 course. This would draw more crossover people which would help get the biggest crowd. It would be great to see the service pistol and service rifle days next to each other.

Leg matches are my favorite matches. The dates are written on my calendar well in advance. Shooting more of them will be great.

If the goal is to get the winning scores to go up while drawing more overall shooters, these changes will certainly represent our best chance.

DeweyHales wrote:I would love to see the CMP give an award at Perry and the Regional games for highest Pistol and Rifle aggregate. It could be the aggregate of the EICs or the P100 course. This would draw more crossover people which would help get the biggest crowd. It would be great to see the service pistol and service rifle days next to each other

This is a great idea! Especially putting the service rifle and pistol matches back to back. Create some crossover!

Just shot a CMP match at the AL. state match, they had to beg, loan guns and scrounge to get six un distinguished shooters to offer leg points, there were only two newbie CMP shooters who had there own guns, me and the guy that won, only my second time shooting the converted range officer so I wasn't even thinking I had a shot at points, the leg went for 233 points, had I not let one off the page at 50 yards and not let one go in the six ring at 25yds I would have got them. I would have felt just like the guy that did in that he said he was almost ashamed to take them with that kind of score. so imo if they want this area of competition to continue and grow they best do something to boost interest and participation.

I think the idea of a 22 match is great and should accomplish any gains if there are some to be had. the problem as I see it if they make all these changes to pistol requirements it really won't be a service pistol match anymore. It will be more of a "run whatcha brung" type deal. If this is such a great idea then why is there not more participation at NRA centerfire matches, a person can shoot whatever they want there, including dots sights, and yet the numbers have dwindled for years. People are not going to come out of the woodwork just because they can shoot a glock or their favorite revolver. I think support of the 22 match is warranted and based on how that increases participation then consider changing the centerfire match. but I can guess that the same people that DON'T currently shoot the NRA matches will be the same people that WON'T shoot a centerfire ballgun match. DavidR, your signature picture is the exact reason why no body shoots EIC matches anymore, they go to an NRA match and buy guns with dots on them. When I started I bought a ball gun and I shot that until I broke 2500, my goal was 2600, before I put dots on. I went out very quickly because I didn't follow the false sense of learning by using dots. If people weren't so quick to buy wadcutter guns then there could be more people shooting EIC matches. It's really a shame to see a marksman with a dot sight, honestly, i've seen many lifetime marksman and they all had dot sights.

No matter what, we are up against the handgun mindset of shooting two hands at 7-10 yards, rapidly. The shooting industry has brainwashed the masses. I often hear others speak great puzzlement when I shoot 50 yards.

I love the idea of a separate .22 EIC program. It's much more inviting to new shooters who might not want to enter the fray and invest / build a ball gun.

I'm not a huge fan of relaxing the service pistol standards. Still, I'm not sure I see that many people showing up to shoot their CZ at a hardball match. Whatever it takes to grow the sport as long as it retains the original intent is fine by me.

Increasing to five matches plus the NII is great, but will only be worth it if more people come to the sport.

For those of us who aren't Masters/High Experts, shooting in the 255+ range with irons is still plenty challenging--even with SWC ammo.

Even with the other lesser caliber gun choices, everybody will be on a fairly even keel. I believe that those of us who already have guns that are legal for existing rules will still have an equipment advantage over most other guns except for Wadgun shooters--but most wadgun shooters are used to shooting with lighter triggers and a dot.

I still look forward to these changes. I don't see anything here that degrades the badge in my eyes.

Jack H wrote:Most of the potential new shooters I see at our range can not even begin to see or want anything to do with 50 yards let alone one hand.

+1

I don't think a single rule change will bring more people. More advertising and more local matches that run the cmp 1911 as issued and military police is the ticket. 25 yard course of fire. Get people interested in our sport.